Barebones VS. Substrate(rocks/gravel)

[FishingOut]

Sorry sand lovers, We all know sands the best of both worlds, minus the impeller damage.

But which is more useful in regards to overall water quality, Gravel or Barebones?

Barebones Pros, are its easy to clean ALL the poop, Fish eat ALL food dropped in.
Cons: Filter carries almost ALL benifitial becteria, Decorating is dangerous, does not look great, Unnaturalness might make fish uneasy.
But this poll is not about aesthetics.

Gravel Pros, are Much more bio surface for nitrifying bacteria, Looks nicer, tank looks deeper.
Cons: Food falls down in the rocks, Poop falls down in the rocks and rots.

We all know it all boils down to filter capacity/wc schedule and this is an age old argument. Just wanted to see what MFK has to say about the topic.

Im leaning towards "Its easier to keep a barebottom tank clean, but it just doesnt look as good." Its more of a personal preference if your filtration is par.

The reason I ask is I went from sand to black back and bottom barebones and my Dempsey lost 90% of pearling and the fins lost the reflective quality.
Now I have Petco deep river/shallow river rocks (which are absolutly gorgeous). Definatly the best gravel mix ive seen for my money. Actually quality stones.

 

[eatingleg4peanut]

Substrate, I'm not a fan of Barebottom Tanks.

 

[ecoli73]

I am thinking for my new tank, I am going to have slate bottom for hard to reach areas and gravel for open areas that I can vacuum easily.

 

[inssane]

I didn't vote because I like both, but in different situations.
Barebottom are great for big show type fish - FH, arow, etc
Otherwise substrate is king

Also, in the future, go to a rock quarry. Climb up in there and look at all the gorgeous river stones. Place I went to had thousands. Check my pics in sig to see the stones inthe tank.
Plus it's CHEAP. Pay by the pound, so if a rock is too big, not much of a loss

 

[Fat Homer]

personally i cannot stand seeing bare bottom tanks... so i would say any substrate is better than no substrate...

 

[haywood]

Bare tanks are hideous and should not be allowed, especially on 100+ gallon tanks. I cringe when I see people spend thousands on huge tanks and leave them bare. Its terrible. The only bare tank should be a QT tank. Sand allows for more beneficial bacteria and brings out the true nature of the fish. It also looks badass. At the very least these guys should paint the bottom in textured spray paint or do a tile bottom.

 

[haynchinook334]

Bare Bottom for me and all my tanks. (well, tile soon).

 

[MonsterMinis]

I have both.. but picked barebottom on a purely biological level.. easy to maintain no hidden spots for poop or other material to rot. aestetically wise i'm not keen on it.. but I'de rather have my fish in good water, then in poor water but look good doing it!.. I have gravel and live plants in a few of my tanks.. Plastic deco has no place in tanks period imo. PVC pipes being the exception, as they make safe, easy to clean hide spots. Gravels biological surface is inadequete at best unless running UGF's.. which is easily compensated for with proper filtration. Gravel is for my plants.. not my fish.

 

[m1ste2tea]

I believe my fish appreciate the gravel, but I'm sure that some top level fish dont care for it, thus some people choose barebottom.

 

[fishmamma]

Substrate, just cause my eyes like it better... more cleaning but it's fun!